Agency proliferation and the globalization of the regulatory state: Introducing a data set on the institutional features of regulatory agencies

Abstract

State structures have experienced significant transformation with the spread of globalization. This paper examines how to measure one major change that has occurred in recent decades: the worldwide proliferation of public agencies with regulatory tasks. It remains unclear how their configurations vary across countries and sectors, and what can be learned from these variations. To better identify these agencies worldwide, we introduce a new dataset on the institutional features of 799 agencies in 115 countries and 17 policy sectors. The dataset contains variables from their institutional profiles, covering a broad range of formal characteristics. To examine the diverse faces the regulatory state has adopted along its globalization path in depth, our variables are grouped into four blocs: regulatory responsibilities, managerial autonomy, political independence, and public accountability. As such, we depart from the view that a single dimension does capture the actual diversity of institutional forms regulatory agencies may exhibit. We also use factor and cluster analyses to assess their various forms, and suggest a typology of agency institutional models to facilitate more precise studies on the regulatory state. Results confirm that the regulatory state shows greater variety than usually expected.

The Coproduction of Primary and Secondary Legislation: Israel as a Case Study of Substitutive Relationships

“…It also sheds new light on the phenomenon of legalization, which has been mainly identified with the process of juridification, in which the courts have attracted the most attention (see Blichner and Molander ). The increasing legalization of politics has also been reflected in the growing scholarly attention paid to the concepts of the “regulatory state” (Majone , ; Braithwaite ; Moran ; Scott ; Levi‐Faur , ), “regulatory capitalism” (Levi‐Faur ; Braithwaite ; Levi‐Faur ), and the proliferation of regulatory agencies (Gilardi ; Jordana, Levi‐Faur, and Fernandez‐i‐Marín ; Jordana, Fernández‐i‐Marín, and Bianculli ). However, legalization as a form of rule growth is still an unexplored phenomenon.…”

Modes of regulatory governance: A political economy perspective

“…The work of Majone has been a source of inspiration for a new generation of political scientists that have focused on putting his theoretical intuitions to the test. Starting from the late 1990s, scholars have analyzed the phenomenon of “agencification” (Jordana et al, ) and addressed in particular the issue of regulatory agency independence, seen as the distinctive feature of this mode of governance (Elgie & McMenamin, ; Gilardi, , ; Jordana, Fernández‐i‐Marín, & Bianculli, ; Maggetti, ; Mathieu & Rangoni, ; Pavón Mediano, ). These contributions have shed light on the determinants of independence, confirming the link between the need for credibility and agency independence, as well as the importance of other factors such as the presence of veto players and political uncertainty.…”

Toezicht en governance in de open samenleving

“…politiek markten aansturen door middel van flexibele regulering. Het marktwerkingsmodel is gestaag opgetrokken van het economische naar het sociale domein en heeft zich vanuit westerse neoliberale economieën mondiaal verspreid (Jordana, Fernández-i-Marín, X., & Bianculli., 2018;Levi-Faur, 2012), niet alleen als empirisch fenomeen, maar ook als normatief ideaal (Ruggie, 2018;Roberts, 2010. Deze ontwikkeling loopt parallel aan de globalisering van productie, dienstverlening, informatievoorziening, en kapitaalverstrekking, en de multinational als hét standaardmodel voor economische activiteiten in transnationaal verband (Ruggie, 2018). De regulerende staat stuurt de maatschappij niet via herverdeling, zoals de verzorgingsstaat, of samenwerking, zoals 'collaborative governance', maar via regels: regelgeving, marktordening, verantwoording, toezicht, en handhaving zijn de centrale sturingsmechanismen in mondiale markten (Levi-Faur, 2012).…”

“…De regulerende staat stuurt de maatschappij niet via herverdeling, zoals de verzorgingsstaat, of samenwerking, zoals 'collaborative governance', maar via regels: regelgeving, marktordening, verantwoording, toezicht, en handhaving zijn de centrale sturingsmechanismen in mondiale markten (Levi-Faur, 2012). De regulerende staat heeft ook geleid tot een enorme groei aan publieke toezichthouders die naleving bevorderen en risico's beheersen (Jordana et al, 2018). Maar in het governance tijdperk opereren deze publieke toezichthouders niet alleen hiërarchisch, maar ook zij aan zij met ondernemingen, brancheorganisaties, private toezichthouders, maatschappelijke controleurs, belangenorganisaties, media en intermediairs, bij het controleren van een explosie aan publieke en private regels, normen, standaarden, codes en contracten -al met al een lappendeken van actoren en arrangementen of, naar analogie van Presdee, een bonte carnavalsstoet van controleurs en handhavers (Schuilenburg 2012, pp.…”